Floor Statements

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Madam Speaker, let's cut right to the chase. This budget is an attack on freedom. It's an assault on fundamental liberties. I mean, you just go down the line. Tax increases, record tax increases in this bill which deny opportunities to Americans to use their money to spend on their goals, their dreams, their kids, their grandkids--the largest tax increase in history.

Spending. Unprecedented levels of spending. We've heard all the stats, but this budget piles up more spending over the next decade than the previous 43 Presidents combined. We've heard it ``from George to George,'' from Washington to Bush, we don't pile up as much deficit as we do over the next decade with this budget--denying future Americans the opportunities they need to achieve their goals and their dreams, to reach what we would all call the American Dream.

Third, further nationalizes health care. Think about this. The ability to make health care decisions should be between you and your family and your physician, you and your family and your personal doctor, not some board in Washington, not some bureaucrats in D.C. who think they know all the answers. Again, denial of freedom and liberty for Americans across the board.

Then finally, let me finish with this. Cap-and-trade, the largest energy tax in history. It will require every single American, all 304 million Americans, to pay more because now energy is going to cost more, which means everything we produce will cost more. Every single American will pay more, hurting us at a time when we're trying to get out of a recession.

Any four of these are bad anytime. But to do all four when we're trying to recover from a recession just makes no sense. This cap-and- trade, the Heritage Foundation did a study released 1 month ago. Districts that are heavy in manufacturing--like the one I have the privilege of representing--are so hard hit because you have got to have energy to produce the goods and services that our economy requires. If you want to be the leading economy in the world, you have to have energy. This thing is going to lead to an energy tax that will be unprecedented.

Again, up and down the line we deny liberty, we deny opportunity to Americans with this budget. That's why I would urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the University of Findlay Oilers on the occasion of their winning the 2009 NCAA Division II men's basketball championship. The Oilers defeated the Cal Poly Pomona Broncos for the championship on Saturday, March 28, 2009, in Springfield, Massachusetts.

The Oilers ended their perfect 36-0 season in overtime when senior guard Tyler Evans hit a fade-away three-point shot as time expired, clinching the university's first ever basketball title. With this win, the Oilers become only the fourth perfect championship team in Division II men's basketball history. The Oilers are also the most winning team in Division II of the past decade, with a record of 238-46.

I would also like to congratulate Head Coach Ron Niekamp and his coaching staff for their outstanding commitment to Oilers basketball. Coach Niekamp was named the 2009 Molten Division II Bulletin Coach of the Year. In addition, senior forward Josh Bostic was named the 2009 Division II Player of the Year.

I am honored to join the chorus of well-wishers as the University of Findlay and the broader community celebrates this remarkable achievement. I join with my colleagues in wishing them all continued success.

I have an amendment at the desk.

Madam Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the chair of the Republican Study Committee, our colleague from the State of Georgia, Congressman Price.

I thank the Chair. Before yielding to our colleague from Tennessee, I would say this. Our budget grows every year. It just doesn't grow at a pace that is going to saddle future generations of Americans with a debt they can't pay back. And that is why it is a responsible budget.

I yield to the gentlelady from Tennessee, a champion of conservative principles, Mrs. Blackburn, for 2 minutes.

Madam Chair, before I yield to my colleague from Louisiana, I yield myself 30 seconds just to respond briefly.

We do put up a stop sign. We put up a stop sign to debt. Under the Obama Democratic budget plan, $23 trillion in national debt would be brought to the citizens of this country. Now think about what it takes to repay that. You would have to first get to balance, then you would have to run a $1 trillion surplus for 23 years just to pay that debt off. So we do put up a stop sign. It is a stop sign to that kind of debt.

And with that, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

Madam Chair, I would yield 2 minutes to our good friend from Georgia, Congressman Kingston.

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Madam Chairman, I'm pleased to yield 3 minutes to former RSC chair and current conference chair, the gentleman from Indiana.

(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

I would be happy to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Arizona, a friend and colleague, Congressman Flake.

Madam Chair, I would be pleased to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. Cassidy.

Madam Chair, I think we'll reserve.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. McHenry).

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Before yielding the balance of our time, let me just thank our chairman of the RSC for his leadership on this particular issue. Also, our staff did tremendous work in helping us put this budget together that we think is responsible, stable and represents common sense.

With that, I would yield to our former chairman, the gentleman from Arizona, Congressman Shadegg.

Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

I thank the gentleman for yielding and just would say, Madam Chair, that the passion that the gentleman from Wisconsin displayed in his opening remarks was right on target. It was totally appropriate because this budget is an assault on liberty. It's an attack on freedom, and it does so in four ways.

First of all, it is the largest tax increase in history, which attacks the liberty and freedom of current taxpayers. We're going to have to pay more in taxes. We all understand that. It diminishes our opportunity to go after our goals and our dreams--for the American people to pursue those things that have meaning and significance to them. It's an attack on future generations of Americans, as we've heard from every single speaker, because this budget piles up the largest debt in history. There will be more debt in the next 6 years than it took the 43 previous Presidents to accumulate. From George to George-- from Washington to Bush--we didn't accumulate as much debt as this budget will do in the next 6 years.

Think about this: A $23 trillion national debt this budget takes us to. Think about this: To pay that off, we first have to get to balance. Then we have to run a $1 trillion surplus for 23 years, and that's not even counting the interest. That's what we have to do to pay this. That's how big this is.

There are two other ways it attacks freedom: The cap-and-trade that the gentleman from California talked so eloquently about. This is going to be a tax on every single American and on every single small business owner. It's going to make it that much tougher for us to compete in the international marketplace, particularly against our emerging competitors in China and in Japan.

Then, finally, the further nationalizing of health care: The money set aside in this budget to create this board that's going to now decide what kind of health care treatment you and your family receive, not you and your doctor, not you and your family. A bunch of bureaucrats in Washington are going to be deciding what kind of health care you're going to get.

In my mind, this is not alarmist talk. These are the facts. The liberties and freedoms of Americans are at stake, and it's important we recognize that.

I want to close with this, Madam Chair: Twelve days ago, in our district, Olen Beck was born--9 pounds, 3 ounces, 19\1/4\ inches long, named after his grandfather. Little does this baby Olen know, but he already owes more than $30,000 in debt, and if this budget passes before this young man can even write his name, he will owe $70,000. That's what this budget does.

One of the things that makes this country great is the willingness of parents to make sacrifices for their children so they can have life a little better than they did, and they, in turn, become adults and parents, and they do the same thing for the next generation. It has been that cycle that has allowed the United States of America to be the greatest Nation in history. When we begin to break that trend, to break that process, that's when we have problems, and that's what this budget does, and that's why I urge a ``no'' vote.

I thank the gentleman from Louisiana and our colleague from Missouri for this Special Order hour, and appreciate the chance to be with you.

You know, you hear ``tax and spend'' politicians. I would argue it is actually the opposite, it is spend and tax. Spending always drives the equation. Spending requires the increase in taxes. Spending requires the increase in borrowing. Spending is what hurts the future of our kids and our grandkids. And I know this has been pointed out because I see the chart that the gentleman from Louisiana has displayed.

This budget, the Obama Democratic budget in the next 6 years adds more to the national debt than it took the previous 43 Presidents to accumulate. So, from George to George, from Washington to Bush, we didn't pile up as much debt as this administration is going to do in the next 6 years. And I would argue this: When you pile up that much debt, when you borrow and spend and spend and borrow and spend and tax that much, it is actually an attack on freedom.

When you tax that much, it is obviously an attack on the freedom of taxpayers today, because we no longer have as much money, as much purchasing power, as much of our income to use on the goals and dreams and those objectives that we have as individuals and families. But probably more importantly, when you spend and tax and spend and borrow as much as this budget does, it is an attack on the future freedom, the freedom of future generations of Americans.

And I read this in Budget Committee last week, Congressman, and it I think captures what is at stake here and why this is actually a moral question, in my mind. About 2 weeks ago in our district, Andrew and Emily Beck from Carey, Ohio gave birth to their first child, their son, Olen, nine pounds, three ounces, 19\1/2\ inches long, named after his grandfather. Little does Baby Olen know, but he already owes more than $30,000 in debt; and, if this majority's budget is passed, that debt will go to $70,000 by the time he is able to write his name. I mean, Baby Olen already with that kind of debt, and in just a few years it will reach $70,000 that every single person in this country is going to owe when you think about the amount of spending, the amount of taxing, the amount of borrowing that takes place in the majority's budget.

Americans get it. I know the gentleman from Louisiana, my friend and colleague, was talking about the optimism that we heard from our friend from Missouri as well. Americans get it. It is why you are seeing all across the country these taxpayer tea parties, where people are showing up and expressing their outrage at this kind of spending, this kind of behavior from their government, their Congress.

In fact, we had just 3 weeks ago in Ohio, on the first nice spring Sunday afternoon in Cincinnati, Ohio, we had over 4,000 people show up in Cincinnati to say: Enough is enough. Stop the craziness, stop the insanity, stop this ridiculous level of spending. Exercise a little discipline, exercise a little fiscal restraint. Make those tough decisions that we sent you to Washington to make.

And it is always easy, I think I related this story another time on the floor. I had a coach in high school who talked about discipline every single day in practice. He talked about it in the classroom, he taught chemistry and physics, he would talk about it in the wrestling room, he talked about it every day: Self-discipline is the key. You have got to have self-discipline. He would talk about it all the time. And he had a great definition. I got sick of hearing him talk about it, as many teenagers would, but I am glad he did. He had a great definition. He said: Discipline is doing what you don't want do when you don't want to do it. Basically, that meant doing things his way when you would rather do them your own way. It meant doing things the right way when you would rather do them the convenient way.

And that is what we need around here. The easiest thing in the world for politicians to do is to get ahold of the taxpayer wallet and spend the money. The tough thing to do is usually the right thing to do, and that is to say, you know what, we are going to have

to prioritize. We can't spend and spend and spend. We are going to have to slow down this spending, quit borrowing, quit mortgaging the future of Baby Olen and other kids around this country and say we are going to do the right thing, which is get spending under control.

That is why this budget is wrong. That is why we will have an alternative that will have some fiscal restraint, will lower taxes on the American families that are already overtaxed, and do those things that we think will help improve the future economic situation of this country.

With that, I yield back to my colleague. And I appreciate, again, his hard work on this Special Order hour and this hard work in the Congress, along with our colleague from Missouri.

I appreciate the gentleman yielding.

Mr. Speaker I wanted to talk about the point we were on earlier, the greatness of this country and the freedom that we have enjoyed for over two centuries. My friend from Louisiana made the point about one of the things that makes us special, that makes us the greatest nation in history, is this idea that parents make sacrifices for their kids so they can have life a little better than they did. And then that generation in turn, when they become parents, does the same thing for the next. And it has been that continuation that has led to the amazing standard of living we enjoy in this country and prosperity and wealth over the years. It is a fascinating principle that parents make the sacrifices to help their next generation. Unfortunately, what you see in this budget is exactly the opposite. We are taxing and spending and borrowing and mortgaging the future of our children and our grandchildren in exactly the wrong direction that we need to proceed.

Our colleague from Missouri talked about the loss of freedom. And if you think about this budget, I want to just talk about four things. There is an attack on liberty. There's an assault on freedom, as our friend from Missouri pointed out. The tax increases contained in this budget, when you tax people more and take more of their money, you are taking away their ability to go after their goals and dreams, to pursue those objectives and those initiatives that have meaning and significance to them and to their kids and their family and their small business. When you increase spending at this rate, we talked about this before, when you have this kind of spending and this kind of debt piled up, you limit the liberty and freedom of future generations of Americans. And when you impose in this budget, which is in the document, this tax on energy that we have called the cap and trade or cap and tax, this cap-and-trade concept which places a tax on all the energy in our economy, when you do that, you limit the freedom of the entrepreneur and the small business owner out there to get the energy he or she needs to grow their business and help our economy improve. It is a direct attack on freedom for small businesses owners.

Probably the one that gets Americans the most is this idea that in this budget we are going to create this national health board which is going to be in the business of determining what kind of health care you and your family get. Instead of you and your doctor and your family sitting down and figuring out what kind of health care treatment you're going to get, we are going to have this national board. Money is set aside in this budget to pursue this advancement of nationalized health care. I think, just what we need, the Federal Government determining how we get our health care. That is a direct attack on freedom for families across this country.

One of the things I know about Americans for sure, it is just part of who we are as a people, we hate being told what to do. We hate this concept. Our colleague from Missouri was talking about the folks who settled this place. They came here because they wanted to practice their faith in the way they felt was most appropriate. They didn't like the idea they were

told what they were going to be taxed and what they were going to do and didn't have representation. Americans hate being told what to do. My friend from Louisiana may have heard the old line, for most Americans when they are traveling down the highway and they see the sign that says ``55,'' for most Americans that is not the limit. That is the challenge. That is just the way we are. It is part of being an American. And this budget tells so many Americans, ``we are going to take away your freedom. We are going to tell you how things are going to be. We are going to take more of your money. We are going to mortgage your kids' future. We are going to impose a cap and trade on this economy which is going to hurt the ability of our economy to recover and make it tougher for business owners to get the energy they need to grow their business and improve and create jobs. And we are going to tell you and your family what kind of health care treatment you're going to get.''

Americans aren't going to stand for it. Again, we keep coming back to this. But consistent with the American tradition, it is great to see families and Americans and taxpayers all over this country, and they are all going to do it again on April 15 at these taxpayer tea parties, they are going to stand up and say ``do you know what? We are not going to take it.'' Just like we have done for over 200 years, we are going to tell our elected officials, we are going to tell the government, we are going to tell the Congress that we don't want our liberties attacked, and we want things done right. And it is great to see that again.

I appreciate the leadership of our colleague and friend from Louisiana and our friend and colleague from Missouri for making these points and letting me join them this evening. I yield back to our friend from Louisiana.

I thank my friend and colleague from Louisiana. I appreciate his good work on this issue and many others. My friend mentioned the tea parties that are taking place across this country. The reason you see families and taxpayers and Americans gathering at these events is because they get it. I learned a long time ago that the people always get it before the politicians do. And they understand that this kind of spending and what it means for their kids and their grandkids and what it means for future generations of Americans is just plain wrong.

My colleague has pointed out some of the numbers. But just put it in perspective of just what has happened in the last 6 weeks. First, we had the $700 billion so-called stimulus and all the program spending that was in that bill. The bill was designed to help jump-start our economy, but we all know it was mostly just spending on Federal Government programs.

Then we had the $410 billion omnibus with its over 800 earmarks. Now, this week, with the budget vote going to happen in the Budget Committee, which I have the privilege of being a member of, we will now have, as my colleague pointed out, a budget that has the 10 largest annual deficits in American history. A budget that will go from--and this is important--from 29 percent of GDP spending to over 28 percent of the gross domestic product. A budget that will increase spending over $1 trillion this year; a budget that will double the national debt in the next 8 years.

Frankly, and I think this is interesting, a budget that adds more to the debt in 6 years--now, think about this--this administration is going to add more to the national debt with their budget numbers in the next 6 years than it took all 43 previous Presidents to accumulate. So more than 6 years that it took over 200 years to get to. That's how much spending we are talking about.

You don't take my word for it. Take the statement that Senator Gregg made today, where he said this budget is going to, in his words, ``bankrupt the country.'' This is the same guy that the Obama administration wanted as a part of their administration. Initially offered him the job of Commerce Secretary.

Take some senior Democrat Members of the Senate. Senator Conrad said, ``More discipline on the spending side is also going to be required of this budget.'' Some Democrats are getting the idea this budget is way out of line. They understand what my colleague talked about, and that is this budget is harmful to future generations of Americans, harmful to our economy, and is the wrong direction to go.

We need a budget that spends less, taxes less, and borrows less. That is what we want to talk about this evening.

I'm happy to yield back to my colleague, and look forward to participating more in this hour. But I appreciate his leadership on this issue and reserving this time this evening.

With that, I yield back.

I appreciate the gentleman.

Not only is it record levels of spending; it is being done at a record pace. Let me just give you a couple facts. Think about this. This is why Americans, as we have talked about already, are showing up, Mr. Speaker, at these tea parties, because they are sick of this type of activity from their government that their tax dollars support.

Think about this: $24 billion is being spent each day. Over the first 50 days of the new administration, Democrats have spent approximately $24 billion a day, most of it with borrowed money. Over the first 50 days of this new administration, Democrats have spent approximately $1 billion an hour, most of it with borrowed money.

So it is not just the amount; it is the pace at which this spending is going on. And you wonder why thousands of people are showing up in cities across this country, families, taxpayers, small business owners are showing up and saying, enough is enough. We are tired of this bailout fever, this spending fever that has got a hold of Washington. We want some sanity back in

our government. We want some sanity back in our Congress.

And it's not just about the numbers. We are going to give tons of numbers here in this hour, and the gentleman from Louisiana and the doctor from Louisiana have given some numbers and some history as well. But in the end, it is about people and the impact this has. Think about this budget that is going to be in the Budget Committee for a vote this Wednesday, 2 days from now, this budget with record levels of spending, record deficit, tenth largest annual deficit in American history over the next 10 years, think about this budget. And I don't think it is being an alarmist to say this: This is an attack on freedom, because think about what this budget does. It is the largest tax increase in history. When you take money out of the pockets of families, and I have said before, I am convinced some politicians won't be happy until they have an IV hooked up to the taxpayers' wallet and they can hit the drip button any time they want. They want the money. They think they are smarter than the American family out there.

So record level of taxes, unprecedented continuation of the spending that we have been talking about, a further nationalization of health care. Now, think about all three of those for a second. When they take your money, you have less freedom. When they spend and spend and spend and mortgage our kids' and grandkids' future, that simply means the next generations of Americans are going to have less freedom because they are going to have to pay that money back, which means less money in their pockets to go after their goals and dreams. When you have a further nationalization of health care and you have some centralized board here in Washington deciding what kind of health care you and your family are going to get, that is a loss of liberty. And the worse one, which we haven't even got to, and I know my colleague from Louisiana understands this issue probably better than anybody on the floor tonight, that is this cap-and-trade, cap-and-tax concept, which will be the largest tax increase in history. Every single family, every single business owner is going to pay more in energy and utility costs. All those in this budget.

So I think when we talk about an attack on liberty and an attack on freedom, it is not using too strong of language, I think it is just being honest. Because the word and principle we most associate with the United States of America is freedom, and that is what this budget is attacking. And that is why we are here tonight under the leadership of our friend from Louisiana talking about how bad this is and the direction that it takes our country, and why we think our policies of keeping taxes low, getting spending under control, not imposing this crazy cap-and-trade concept on American families and business owners is the right approach to take.

With that, I yield back to my colleague from Louisiana.

I just want to make a quick point and just reiterate what my friend from Louisiana just had mentioned. Think of the contrast of what American families are having to do with their budget in this tough economic situation they find themselves in versus what the Federal Government is going to do. I just want to go back and talk about one fact I had talked about earlier, because when you talk about spending at this rate, the new administration, the Democrats in Congress, are spending approximately $24 billion every day in the first 50 days of this administration. This is unprecedented spending. When you spend that fast, when you spend that much, it is no wonder you make mistakes like this AIG fiasco we had last week.

So again, the contrast could not be more clear with what American families are doing in the tough economic times they face and they have to deal with versus how the Federal Government is reacting. Families are tightening their belt. They are doing what American families have had to do many other times in history when things got tough. But their government is spending at unprecedented levels and at an unprecedented pace, making mistakes as they do it. And we saw that last week.

So again I yield back to my friend and colleague and thank him for his work on this important issue.

I thank the gentleman for yielding to me and appreciate his reference to Dr. Healy. I have her name in my notes as well.

But let me start by saying this. Look, we understand there is a debate in our culture over whose set of principles, whose set of values are going to prevail.

And that is, of course, one of those fundamental principles is respect for human life. It is why I so appreciate the Congressman from New Jersey and his leadership of the Pro-Life Caucus here in Congress, because he has had a steadfast adherence to that fundamental principle that all life is sacred and worthy of protection, that same principle that the Founders of this country understood when they wrote down the words that started this great experiment that we call America. And they said, ``We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.''

I always tell folks it's interesting to note the order the Founders placed the rights that they chose to mention, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness. You can't pursue your goals and dreams, you can't go after those things that have meaning and significance to you and your family if you don't first have freedom. And you never have true freedom, true liberty, if government doesn't protect your most fundamental right, your right to life.

That's ultimately what this debate is about. When the President the other day issued his executive order, at the press event he talked about the adherence to science and picking science over politics.

I am sure that the chair of the Pro-Life Caucus, the gentleman from New Jersey and our friend from Texas who has joined us, know that the science is on our side. All the positive treatments, all the beneficial things that have happened to individuals and their families who love and care about them, in treating disease, have happened through the adult stem cell research, not the stem cell research that destroys human life.

And so we strongly support the use of science in developing the cures and the treatments that are going to help people. And it's interesting to note the ethical decision is the smart decision, and right now the evidence is all on our side.

The Congressman from New Jersey is exactly right when he talks about Dr. Healy. What's interesting is Dr. Healy and I did a radio show the other night, talked about this, she happens to be a Republican but also ran as a candidate for the United States Senate as a pro-abortion, pro- choice candidate. So she doesn't exactly share our belief on this issue completely, and yet she is willing to look at the science in an objective way and come down on the right side.

Two last things I would finish with here in my remarks, this decision scares me in a couple of ways, the first one is this, the slippery slope argument is real. I mean, once you start down this road there are all kinds of problems that can accompany this that are harmful. My guess is the gentleman from New Jersey has talked about cloning and some of the other things that this can lead to.

I am sure your comments will be appropriate in that area. These are scary things. But, remember, politicians are good at saying one thing and not exactly following through on it. So even though people will tell us they support this, there are safeguards built in, we know it destroys life and we know that there are worse things that can come down the road.

Finally, I would say this, thus far, with this administration, we have seen a couple of pro-life policies overturned, the Mexico City policy with an executive order, and now the stem cell, the embryonic stem cell research policy.

We know, as we now enter the 2010 appropriations cycle, and what's going to happen with taxpayer dollars as we move forward relative to protecting life and the fact that millions of families, millions of Americans don't want their tax dollars used to promote something that they know is wrong. As we move into that debate, the precedent has been set now with these two decisions. We have got a fight on our hands. There are 22 what are commonly called pro-life riders that are part of the appropriation bills that we need to protect.

The one that most people understand and recognize is the Hyde amendment which says we are not going to use your tax dollars to perform the abortion procedure in this country. We are going to protect the use of your tax dollars.

So this idea that we are now moving in a direction that is going to use tax dollars for embryonic stem cell research sets a dangerous precedent. And it's something that we have to watch as we move forward, because, again, the vast majority of families in this country don't want their tax dollars used for this procedure.

So, again, I commend the gentlemen who are with us here tonight, particularly our chairman of the Pro-Life Caucus, Congressman Smith, for your steadfast adherence to the fundamental principle that life is precious, life is sacred and deserves the protection that the law should offer it.

For just a second, and I appreciate the gentleman bringing that up, we did have a bipartisan press event where we announced 181 Members of Congress, Republican and Democrat, signing a letter to the Speaker of the House, telling the Speaker, don't mess with this language. This protects human beings. This protects taxpayer dollars. This protects what the vast majority of Americans respect.

Don't change these procedures. Don't do what the Obama administration has already done twice, protect these procedures. And if you do mess with it, at least give us the rule so we can have a debate on the floor. At least allow us to play the game, have the debate, the full debate in front of the American people and have the vote.

You can't get 181 Members to sign anything around here. The fact that we got a bipartisan 181 Members is testimony to the work that the Pro- Life Caucus does and to the importance of this fundamental issue.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Republican Conference standards, I am submitting the following information for publication concerning a project included at my request in the Fiscal Year 2009 Omnibus.

Requesting Member: Jim Jordan (Fourth Ohio District)

Bill Number: H.R. 1105, the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009

Account: United States Army Corps of Engineers, Section 205 (Flood Damage Reduction)

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: United States Army Corps of Engineers, Buffalo District

Address of Requesting Entity: 1776 Niagara Street, Buffalo, New York 14207

Description of Request: The City of Findlay, Ohio, saw three of its worst floods in history in just a 13-month period in 2007-8. These floods devastated the city, causing significant damage to the downtown business district and displacing hundreds of residents. The Army Corps of Engineers has worked diligently since the January 2007 flood toward developing flood damage reduction plans; the feasibility study is on schedule for completion in 2010.

I certify that neither I nor my spouse has any financial interest in this project.

I thank the gentleman for yielding and for the comments from our colleague from Virginia too.

I want to just take us a minute to thank the gentleman from New Jersey for his commitment over the years, over the decades, even though you don't look that old, over the decades of standing up for the defenseless, the most vulnerable, for standing up and making a commitment to the truth that all life is precious, it should be

protected, it is sacred, and government has a fundamental responsibility to protect the weak from the strong. That is what Congressman Smith has done for years, and I am proud to join in that effort, along with other pro-life Members of the United States Congress.

We all want positive treatments to result from stem cell research. We just don't want to destroy human life in getting those treatments. And I thought the gentleman's comments from Virginia were right on target where he talked about the positive results, the positive treatments that have resulted from adult stem cell research. Unbelievable. The scorecard, as the gentleman from Virginia pointed out, is overwhelmingly in favor.

It is interesting, and the gentleman from New Jersey made this point: The ethical decision is the smart decision. The ethical decision is the actual productive decision. It is the one that leads to positive results for families, for people out there, so they can get the treatment they need, and doesn't destroy human life in the process. That is what we should champion. That is the ideal that is consistent with this country that is frankly consistent with our founding.

I always go back to this, and I will close with this and yield back to our pro-life chairman of the Pro-Life Caucus. The document that started it all, and I think it is important to go back to these first principles, the document that started it all in this country, the Declaration of Independence, it is interesting what the Founders said when they said we hold these truths to be self-evident. All are created equal, endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

It is always interesting to note the order the Founders placed the rights they chose to mention. Can you pursue happiness, can you go after your goals and your dreams, those things that have meaning and significance to you and your family if you first don't have liberty, if you first don't have freedom? And do you ever experience true liberty, true freedom, if government doesn't protect that most fundamental right, your right to life.

That is what the congressman from New Jersey, Congressman Smith, has been doing for years, and we appreciate that and we are proud to join in that effort to protect human life and to protect research that is actually going to make sure we protect human life as we move forward and get those positive results that are going to help all kinds of people across this country, around the world, all kinds of families around this country and around the world.

Well said, Congressman Smith.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to our distinguished colleague from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren).

I yield the gentleman an additional minute.

Mr. Chairman, I would yield 2 minutes to my friend and colleague from Texas, Congressman Gohmert.

I yield 2 minutes to a colleague and friend from Iowa, Congressman King.

I yield an additional minute to the gentleman.

If the gentleman from Michigan has more speakers, we will reserve the balance of our time.

We will continue to reserve the balance of our time.

Mr. Chairman, I continue to reserve.

I will be closing.

Mr. Chairman, there is nothing in this bill that requires borrowers to attempt to work out a loan modification prior to filing for bankruptcy. There is nothing in this bill that will limit bankruptcy relief to only those borrowers that are in danger to losing their homes because they have a subprime or nontraditional loan.

In fact, I offered this very amendment to limit the scope of the provision in committee, same amendment that was actually the bill that came out of committee last session. Unfortunately, that was defeated.

There is nothing in this bill that addresses the moral hazard the bankruptcy provisions will create by incentivizing homeowners to file for bankruptcy so they can cram down their principal and receive a windfall when housing prices rise in the future. And there is nothing in this bill that will place a sunset on the bankruptcy provisions so that this relief is limited to the current crisis.

Americans want solutions to this crisis that do not abandon accountability and that do not reward those who acted irresponsibly. But think about this: 94 percent of mortgages are being paid on time. It is wrong to tell those individuals they are now going to have to in some way compensate or not be able to get credit in the future to accommodate those individuals, that 6 percent, who have behaved in an irresponsible fashion.

Bankruptcy cramdown is not such a solution. It absolves lenders and borrowers of the responsibility, passing that responsibility off on the taxpayers, those who borrowed responsibly, and those who will seek to borrow responsibly in the future.

I urge my colleagues to vote against this bill.

I yield back the remainder of our time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in favor of H. Res. 18.

It is my pleasure to stand here and recognize a fellow Ohioan for his great years of service. The world lost one of its greatest actors, film directors, entrepreneurs, and humanitarians last September when Paul Leonard Newman lost his battle with lung cancer at the age of 83--the legendary actor, whose steely blue eyes, good humor and passion for helping the less fortunate made him one of the most prominent figures in the American arts for over 50 years.

Paul Newman was born on January 26, 1925 in Shaker Heights, Ohio. His father owned a sporting goods store, but Mr. Newman was more interested in following his mother's and uncle's interest in the arts, and he started acting in grade school. After less than a year at Ohio University in Athens, he joined the Navy, and served for 3 years during World War II. After the war, he attended Kenyon College on an athletic scholarship where he played football and acted in numerous plays before graduating in 1949. Mr. Newman later studied drama at Yale University, and soon thereafter, he made his first debut on Broadway in the play ``Picnic.'' A year later, in 1954, he starred in his first Hollywood film, ``The Silver Chalice,'' a flop that he good-naturedly laughed at for the rest of his life.

Although his first film was a failure in his eyes, the 1956 movie ``Somebody Up There Likes Me'' made him a star, and more hits followed: ``The Long, Hot Summer'' opposite his soon-to-be-wife, Joanne Woodward, ``Cat on a Hot Tin Roof'' and ``The Young Philadelphians.'' All of these film classics have withstood the test of time for movie enthusiasts.

Mr. Newman was one of the few actors who successfully made a transition from 1950s cinema to the new film eras of the 1960s and 1970s. He began the decade with ``Exodus,'' ``The Hustler,'' ``Sweet Bird of Youth,'' ``Hud,'' ``Harper and Hombre,'' and many more. In 1968, he turned to directing, earning enthusiastic reviews for his work on ``Rachel, Rachel,'' starring his wife. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Mr. Newman played an integral part in the creation of the highest grossing films of their time--``Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid'' and ``The Sting''--winning many awards, including best picture for the latter.

However, the movies and occasional stage roles were never enough. In the 1970s, he turned to race car driving, an obsession he picked up in midlife after he was cast as a race car driver in the film ``Winning.'' His first race was in 1972, and his first professional victory was in 1982. He was a co-owner of the Newman/Haas Indy racing team, and at the age of 70, he participated in the 24 Hours of Daytona. He was still racing at the age of 80.

In 1982, as a joke, he decided to sell the salad dressing he created and bottled for friends and family at Christmas. Thus was born the food marketing phenomenon known as ``Newman's Own'' products. More than 25 years later, the brand has expanded to include other foods, ranging from popcorn to spaghetti sauce to wine. All of its profits, more than $200 million, have been donated to charity. Much of the money was used to create a number of Hole in the Wall Gang Camps named after the outlaw gang in ``Butch Cassidy.'' The eleven summer camps, located all over the world, provide free recreation for gravely ill children.

His humanitarian efforts also reach to those with alcohol and drug addiction at the Scott Newman Center, which is in honor of his first born and only son, who died in 1978 at the age of 28 because of a drug and alcohol overdose. It is run by the oldest of his five daughters, Susan Newman, and its mission is to publicize the danger of drugs and alcohol.

Finally, 25 years after ``The Hustler'' and seven Academy Award nominations, Mr. Newman won an Oscar in 1986 for his role in ``The Color of Money.'' He continued to act, charming many with his role in ``Road to Perdition'' at the age of 77. He finally retired in 2007, saying he had lost his confidence and abilities.

The world will mourn Paul Newman--the actor, race car driver and renowned philanthropist--and those blue eyes that mesmerized the public will live on in his wonderful films for generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I will continue to reserve.

Mr. Speaker, I will continue to reserve.

Mr. Speaker, I urge support for H. Res. 18.

I yield back the balance of our time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I am honored to speak today in support of H. Res. 83, which has been sponsored by my distinguished colleague from Texas, Mr. Al Green, to recognize Black History Month.

Each February during Black History Month, we express our appreciation for the determination and perseverance of the African American community, as well as remember the struggles they have endured. This resolution is a fitting tribute as we just last month celebrated both the life of the Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., and the historic inauguration of the first African American President of the United States, Barack Obama.

This resolution seeks to do several things. First, it memorializes the great costs African Americans have paid for injustices of the past and present. The Civil Rights Movement and the events that led up to it were a pivotal point in our history. Martin Luther King, Jr., led the charge to right the wrongs of discrimination and strove to create a nation where all men and women are truly equal.

This resolution also seeks to honor the many contributions African Americans have made to all facets of our lives.

We recognize scientists, such as George Washington Carver, who have changed our daily lives; politicians, religious figures, and activists who have helped shape our Nation, and the artists, entertainers, and sports heroes who continue to make our daily lives more enjoyable.

The collective contributions of the African American community has touched every one of our lives in a positive way.

I reserve the balance of our time.

Mr. Speaker, before urging passage of the resolution,

let me just say I think it's a testimony of the greatness of this country that both the two major political parties today have an African American as their leader, with both Michael Steele, and of course our President, Barack Obama.

I urge the passage of this important resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today in support of this bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 2105 East Cook Street in Springfield, Illinois, as the ``Colonel John H. Wilson, Jr. Post Office Building.''

Born on December 18, 1918, in Springfield, Illinois, Colonel Wilson was a true American hero and a pioneer who fought bravely under General George Patton in France during World War II. For his bravery during the war, he was awarded the Silver Star.

An outstanding U.S. Postal Service employee in Springfield for 57 years, Wilson became the first African American Reservist from Illinois to achieve the rank of colonel. Wilson retired from the military in 1973 as group commander of the now-deactivated Springfield-based 303rd Ordinance Ammunition Group after serving for 14 years in active duty and another 17 years in the Reserves.

Sadly, on August 3, 2008, Colonel Wilson died in Springfield, Illinois, in the same Spring Street home in which he was born 89 years before. He leaves behind his wife, Lydia, and their two children.

This honor is appropriate, and by placing his name on the Springfield Post Office where he served for so many years, the memory of his service to his country and community will live on.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support the passage of S. 234, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Staff Sergeant Jason Burkholder, an American hero and a native son of Ohio's Fourth Congressional District who at the age of 27 made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our Nation on February 8, 2009, in Afghanistan.

Jason graduated from Elida High School in 2000 and joined the United States Marine Corps where he served for 4 years. In December 2004 he enlisted in the Ohio Army National Guard, with whom he served as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom. He later joined the Illinois National Guard in 2008.

Jason was an athlete, a leader, a trusted colleague and a loyal friend. He brought energy and excitement to the lives of others. He was a good son and a loving husband. It was a great privilege to speak with Jason's wife, Amanda, as well as his parents, Bruce and Diane. I pray that they will know the fullness of God's peace.

I was moved by the outpouring of affection for Jason from his friends in Allen County, Ohio and beyond. He had a dramatic impact on the lives of many people.

A marine and a soldier, he fought to promote freedom. He gave his life in defense of his family, community, State and Nation. He made our world safer. He made his family and every American proud. For this, each and every American owes him and his family a great debt of gratitude.

Jason will be deeply missed, but the strength of his character and the courage he demonstrated through his service will live on.